Source: Thematix Partners LLC ( Elisa Kendall)
As noted by several FCTs, the current Contract Terms Set concept does not adequately capture the semantics of contract terms, and is also named misleadingly.
This was originally modeled as a grouping of terms, which are terms of the contract, according to some common theme such as interest payment or call terms. The current OWL logic does not reflect that these are a common grouping of terms whose intended range would be that of the Contract.
One change needed is to revise the term that is called Contract Terms Set, which is in effect a Commitment, to actually make it a child of Commitment, thus making the terms of the Contract Terms Set qualifying terms of the Commitment.
This does not reflect the whole story, since those properties which qualify a commitment are themselves also terms of the contract. This can be implied, as a minimum, by identifying that the Commitment is itself related to the contract by some kind of parthood. Changes have been identified by the Foundations FCT to address this, and in fact the kind of parthood relation referred to here applies to things other than the Commitment.
Reported: EDMC-FIBO/FND 1.1 — Sun, 12 Feb 2017 00:59 GMT
Disposition: Resolved — EDMC-FIBO/FND 1.2
Revise and refactor ContractTermsSet and its relationship to Contract
This issue affects section 10.9.2 Ontology: Contracts. It calls for the addition of a new concept, ContractualCommitment, as a child of both ContractualElement and Commitment, changing the parent class of ConditionsPrecedent and NonBindingTermsSet (renamed via deprecation of the original and the addition of a new NonBindingTerms concept) from ContractTermsSet to ContractualElement, revision of definitions related to contractual element, adding definitions for contractual commitment and deprecation of contract terms set. A new property, hasContractualElement, is introduced as a replacement for hasTerms (which is deprecated via this resolution), and finally deprecation of ContractTermsSet.
Minor clean-up of annotations should also be accomplished as appropriate (such as elimination of preceding ‘ ‘ in front of some annotations or at the end of others, revising definitions and sources for some of the existing terms to align better with the new ones, etc.).
Finally, while working through the resolution text, the task force noted that the part of the table describing the properties details for this ontology was incorrect, copied from another ontology and including the properties from that ontology not contracts. This resolution fixes that.
This resolution depends on the resolution to issue
Updated: Thu, 22 Jun 2017 16:43 GMT